akirby

Huh? Rperez said they were making 300 changes every month………… 😂😂

Looks great but I think they’re missing an opportunity not offering the Dark Horse 5.0 or Raptor 3.5 as an upgrade or a supercharged Predator option from the factory. Although it is pretty easy to add the supercharger.

Nothing wrong with more profit until you start taking too many risks. It’s like gambling with no car insurance. You save money but if you’re unlucky it can be catastrophic. Replacing Fusion with Maverick and Bronco Sport was a good move with little risk. Killing Edge and Nautilus for 3 row EVs was a huge risk that ended up being disastrous.

I think warranty costs are the main thing keeping margins below 10%.

Looks like a tremor?? Did you acquire Borg’s famous X-ray vision?

At the very least they need to allow it to be turned off permanently. Forcing people to hit the button every time accomplishes nothing. People who don’t want it turn it off. Remember what Mark K had to do to get around the EPA rules on the 2000 LS selectshift manual mode? Had to start in 2nd gear but if you nailed the throttle it would immediately downshift to first because the EPA test never went full throttle. Stupid games.

LOL

He was talking more about smaller engines used worldwide like the 2.0L turbo. And I was thinking more about truck engines than car engines so I guess it’s not as bad as I suggested. But I still see this as GM catching up to Ford rather than surpassing them with this new V8. Guess we’ll have to wait and see.

Or maybe Ford already spent the money on their v8s over the last 15 years while GM did next to nothing. 500 hp 5.0. Flat plane crank 5.2 Aluminator 5.2 Predator and Carnivore Supercharged 5.2 Not to,emotion the all new 6.8 and 7.3 Godzilla V8s to go along with the high output diesels. All GM is doing is trying to catch up.

How long has Ford been competing with Ram, GM, Toyota and Nissan with full sized pickups? Explorer? Transit? Mustang (u til recently)? bronco (jeep). Theyre not afraid of competition when the products are profitable.

Auto stop start saves about 3-4% fuel and they beefed up both the battery and the starter to handle the wear.

Still their fault for not doing it right the first time (and for having to do the recall to begin with). But yeah the raw numbers can be a little misleading.

He’s right. Outside of sports cars and some high end luxury cars there really isn’t any differentiation at this point.

Nice! You’ll love it. We had a 2016 MKX and now a 2022 nautilus.

Yes we do. It’s obvious from Ford’s European financial results the last 20 years and from Ford insider confirmation and Ford’s business decisions. To compete Ford needed a single long running cheap platform, not 2 or 3 expensive ones. They tried going the premium route with Titaniums and Vignales but with mass market cars price is king. I had a cd4 Fusion titanium and it was great but since I bought it I almost never saw another titanium - just tons and tons of cheap SE models. C2 could fill that bill going forward but there are better opportunities for Ford to pursue with CE1 and other existing products. CE1 has the opportunity to fill that role for Ford in the EV space where there isn’t a lot of competition and the market will increase over time as opposed to continuing to decrease.

(Lower) Price equals volume. But not necessarily profit.

You misspelled hideous….

Different block or just different liners? If so I take back my tweak comments.

Everything you do that uses energy could probably be reduced in some way. You could probably ride a bike instead of driving some places but nobody wants that inconvenience. An escape could be replaced with a much smaller vehicle in a lot of cases. So unless you’re already at the bare minimum it’s hypocritical to call out others. The reason the regulations are the way they are is because it’s easier to regulate mfrs than buyers, and larger trucks and SUVs are still needed for hauling and towing. So the goal was to increase CAFE where possible but still allow for other use cases. But you also can’t fire mfrs to build specific vehicles and vehicle types and sizes, so you can’t eliminate the loophole where they just stop building certain things. It was never intended to work that way but it’s also impossible to stop. Unintended consequences that can’t be avoided. That’s what happens when you make it too difficult to comply.

Considering “what’s left” are the ones that are profitable - a long time.

If you see a v8 diesel truck with 5” exhausts “rolling coal” on other cars and pedestrians there is an 80% chance it’s a Ram and only 10% ford or Chevy.

They’re not even close to the same, at least in the South.

The wheels and grill are a throwback just like the Bronco heritage models. That’s what makes it a heritage version.

Thicker cylinder liners, longer connecting rods and most likely heads adapted from the Nano V6s with dual injection. Not rocket science. Also note hp and torque in Explorer are unchanged at 300/310.

The MPC upgrades are just tweaks to the existing engines, not all new engines. V6 ecoboosts already have dual injection and other upgrades and there is no hole in the lineup for a 3.4L to fill. I’m not saying it wouldn’t yield some improvements but not enough to justify developing an all new engines. Also remember the I4s are global while the v6s are mostly North America. The one wild card would be if it allowed consolidation of engine production if volume continues to go down.